Categorical characterizations of ring properties

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
6
down vote

favorite
3












Looking at the interesting list of ring properties that are inherited from a ring $mathcalR$ by its polynomial ring $mathcalR$[X] and remembering a question I once asked I want to repeat the latter in a more general way:




Can you give ring properties with catchy categorical
characterizations like these:



  • A ring $mathcalR$ has the structure of $mathbbZ$ iff it is an initial object in the category of rings.


  • A ring $mathcalR$ has characteristic $0$ iff the morphism from $mathbbZ$ is a monomorphism.




What about being commutative, factorial, Noetherian, Abelian, or an integral domain?



[Note that the property of having a multiplicative identity (i.e. of being unital) doesn't have to be defined, because it's presupposed in the category of rings.]



List of characterizations from the answers below:



  • A ring $mathcalR$ is Noetherian iff every ascending chain of strong epimorphisms is stationary.


  • A ring $mathcalR$ is finitely presented iff it is a compact object.






ring-theory category-theory definition big-list







share|cite|improve this question



























    up vote
    6
    down vote

    favorite
    3












    Looking at the interesting list of ring properties that are inherited from a ring $mathcalR$ by its polynomial ring $mathcalR$[X] and remembering a question I once asked I want to repeat the latter in a more general way:




    Can you give ring properties with catchy categorical
    characterizations like these:



    • A ring $mathcalR$ has the structure of $mathbbZ$ iff it is an initial object in the category of rings.


    • A ring $mathcalR$ has characteristic $0$ iff the morphism from $mathbbZ$ is a monomorphism.




    What about being commutative, factorial, Noetherian, Abelian, or an integral domain?



    [Note that the property of having a multiplicative identity (i.e. of being unital) doesn't have to be defined, because it's presupposed in the category of rings.]



    List of characterizations from the answers below:



    • A ring $mathcalR$ is Noetherian iff every ascending chain of strong epimorphisms is stationary.


    • A ring $mathcalR$ is finitely presented iff it is a compact object.






    ring-theory category-theory definition big-list







    share|cite|improve this question

























      up vote
      6
      down vote

      favorite
      3









      up vote
      6
      down vote

      favorite
      3






      3





      Looking at the interesting list of ring properties that are inherited from a ring $mathcalR$ by its polynomial ring $mathcalR$[X] and remembering a question I once asked I want to repeat the latter in a more general way:




      Can you give ring properties with catchy categorical
      characterizations like these:



      • A ring $mathcalR$ has the structure of $mathbbZ$ iff it is an initial object in the category of rings.


      • A ring $mathcalR$ has characteristic $0$ iff the morphism from $mathbbZ$ is a monomorphism.




      What about being commutative, factorial, Noetherian, Abelian, or an integral domain?



      [Note that the property of having a multiplicative identity (i.e. of being unital) doesn't have to be defined, because it's presupposed in the category of rings.]



      List of characterizations from the answers below:



      • A ring $mathcalR$ is Noetherian iff every ascending chain of strong epimorphisms is stationary.


      • A ring $mathcalR$ is finitely presented iff it is a compact object.






      ring-theory category-theory definition big-list







      share|cite|improve this question















      Looking at the interesting list of ring properties that are inherited from a ring $mathcalR$ by its polynomial ring $mathcalR$[X] and remembering a question I once asked I want to repeat the latter in a more general way:




      Can you give ring properties with catchy categorical
      characterizations like these:



      • A ring $mathcalR$ has the structure of $mathbbZ$ iff it is an initial object in the category of rings.


      • A ring $mathcalR$ has characteristic $0$ iff the morphism from $mathbbZ$ is a monomorphism.




      What about being commutative, factorial, Noetherian, Abelian, or an integral domain?



      [Note that the property of having a multiplicative identity (i.e. of being unital) doesn't have to be defined, because it's presupposed in the category of rings.]



      List of characterizations from the answers below:



      • A ring $mathcalR$ is Noetherian iff every ascending chain of strong epimorphisms is stationary.


      • A ring $mathcalR$ is finitely presented iff it is a compact object.






      ring-theory category-theory definition big-list




      ring-theory category-theory definition big-list






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited 14 mins ago

























      asked 3 hours ago









      Hans Stricker

      4,91113881




      4,91113881




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          4
          down vote













          There is a notion of noetherian object in any category, which is simply that every ascending chain of subobjects is stationnary. With this definition, noetherian objects in the category of modules over a ring are simply noetherian modules; however, ideals are not subrings (since in general they do not contain the identity element), so noetherian objects in the category of unital rings are not noetherian rings.



          This is easy to fix, however : every ascending chain of ideals
          $$I_0subset I_1subsetdots subset I_nsubset I_n+1subset dots,$$
          in a ring $R$ induces an ascending chain of quotient rings
          $$R/I_0to R/I_1todotsto R/I_nto R/I_n+1to dots$$
          and the original chain of ideals is stationnary if and only if the chain of quotients is. Now quotient maps are just the surjective maps, which are the same thing as strong or regular epimorphisms in the category of rings (or in any "algebraic" category). Thus noetherian rings are precisely those for which every ascending chain of strong epimorphisms is stationnary, which one might call "strongly co-noetherian objects".






          share|cite|improve this answer



























            up vote
            1
            down vote













            The finitely presented rings are the compact objects of the category of rings.
            That is, those objects $R$ such that the functor $hom(R,-)colon mathrm(Ring)tomathrm(Set)$ preserves filtered colimits.
            In fact, this applies to any variety of algebras, e.g., by Jiří Adámek, Jiří Rosický, Locally Presentable and Accessible Categories, Corollary 3.13.






            share|cite|improve this answer




















            • Also see qchu.wordpress.com/2015/04/25/compact-objects and replace modules by rings for a proof.
              – Ben
              17 mins ago










            Your Answer




            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
            );
            );
            , "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function()
            var channelOptions =
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "69"
            ;
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
            createEditor();
            );

            else
            createEditor();

            );

            function createEditor()
            StackExchange.prepareEditor(
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: false,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            );



            );













             

            draft saved


            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2949766%2fcategorical-characterizations-of-ring-properties%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest

















            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            4
            down vote













            There is a notion of noetherian object in any category, which is simply that every ascending chain of subobjects is stationnary. With this definition, noetherian objects in the category of modules over a ring are simply noetherian modules; however, ideals are not subrings (since in general they do not contain the identity element), so noetherian objects in the category of unital rings are not noetherian rings.



            This is easy to fix, however : every ascending chain of ideals
            $$I_0subset I_1subsetdots subset I_nsubset I_n+1subset dots,$$
            in a ring $R$ induces an ascending chain of quotient rings
            $$R/I_0to R/I_1todotsto R/I_nto R/I_n+1to dots$$
            and the original chain of ideals is stationnary if and only if the chain of quotients is. Now quotient maps are just the surjective maps, which are the same thing as strong or regular epimorphisms in the category of rings (or in any "algebraic" category). Thus noetherian rings are precisely those for which every ascending chain of strong epimorphisms is stationnary, which one might call "strongly co-noetherian objects".






            share|cite|improve this answer
























              up vote
              4
              down vote













              There is a notion of noetherian object in any category, which is simply that every ascending chain of subobjects is stationnary. With this definition, noetherian objects in the category of modules over a ring are simply noetherian modules; however, ideals are not subrings (since in general they do not contain the identity element), so noetherian objects in the category of unital rings are not noetherian rings.



              This is easy to fix, however : every ascending chain of ideals
              $$I_0subset I_1subsetdots subset I_nsubset I_n+1subset dots,$$
              in a ring $R$ induces an ascending chain of quotient rings
              $$R/I_0to R/I_1todotsto R/I_nto R/I_n+1to dots$$
              and the original chain of ideals is stationnary if and only if the chain of quotients is. Now quotient maps are just the surjective maps, which are the same thing as strong or regular epimorphisms in the category of rings (or in any "algebraic" category). Thus noetherian rings are precisely those for which every ascending chain of strong epimorphisms is stationnary, which one might call "strongly co-noetherian objects".






              share|cite|improve this answer






















                up vote
                4
                down vote










                up vote
                4
                down vote









                There is a notion of noetherian object in any category, which is simply that every ascending chain of subobjects is stationnary. With this definition, noetherian objects in the category of modules over a ring are simply noetherian modules; however, ideals are not subrings (since in general they do not contain the identity element), so noetherian objects in the category of unital rings are not noetherian rings.



                This is easy to fix, however : every ascending chain of ideals
                $$I_0subset I_1subsetdots subset I_nsubset I_n+1subset dots,$$
                in a ring $R$ induces an ascending chain of quotient rings
                $$R/I_0to R/I_1todotsto R/I_nto R/I_n+1to dots$$
                and the original chain of ideals is stationnary if and only if the chain of quotients is. Now quotient maps are just the surjective maps, which are the same thing as strong or regular epimorphisms in the category of rings (or in any "algebraic" category). Thus noetherian rings are precisely those for which every ascending chain of strong epimorphisms is stationnary, which one might call "strongly co-noetherian objects".






                share|cite|improve this answer












                There is a notion of noetherian object in any category, which is simply that every ascending chain of subobjects is stationnary. With this definition, noetherian objects in the category of modules over a ring are simply noetherian modules; however, ideals are not subrings (since in general they do not contain the identity element), so noetherian objects in the category of unital rings are not noetherian rings.



                This is easy to fix, however : every ascending chain of ideals
                $$I_0subset I_1subsetdots subset I_nsubset I_n+1subset dots,$$
                in a ring $R$ induces an ascending chain of quotient rings
                $$R/I_0to R/I_1todotsto R/I_nto R/I_n+1to dots$$
                and the original chain of ideals is stationnary if and only if the chain of quotients is. Now quotient maps are just the surjective maps, which are the same thing as strong or regular epimorphisms in the category of rings (or in any "algebraic" category). Thus noetherian rings are precisely those for which every ascending chain of strong epimorphisms is stationnary, which one might call "strongly co-noetherian objects".







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered 2 hours ago









                Arnaud D.

                15k52242




                15k52242




















                    up vote
                    1
                    down vote













                    The finitely presented rings are the compact objects of the category of rings.
                    That is, those objects $R$ such that the functor $hom(R,-)colon mathrm(Ring)tomathrm(Set)$ preserves filtered colimits.
                    In fact, this applies to any variety of algebras, e.g., by Jiří Adámek, Jiří Rosický, Locally Presentable and Accessible Categories, Corollary 3.13.






                    share|cite|improve this answer




















                    • Also see qchu.wordpress.com/2015/04/25/compact-objects and replace modules by rings for a proof.
                      – Ben
                      17 mins ago














                    up vote
                    1
                    down vote













                    The finitely presented rings are the compact objects of the category of rings.
                    That is, those objects $R$ such that the functor $hom(R,-)colon mathrm(Ring)tomathrm(Set)$ preserves filtered colimits.
                    In fact, this applies to any variety of algebras, e.g., by Jiří Adámek, Jiří Rosický, Locally Presentable and Accessible Categories, Corollary 3.13.






                    share|cite|improve this answer




















                    • Also see qchu.wordpress.com/2015/04/25/compact-objects and replace modules by rings for a proof.
                      – Ben
                      17 mins ago












                    up vote
                    1
                    down vote










                    up vote
                    1
                    down vote









                    The finitely presented rings are the compact objects of the category of rings.
                    That is, those objects $R$ such that the functor $hom(R,-)colon mathrm(Ring)tomathrm(Set)$ preserves filtered colimits.
                    In fact, this applies to any variety of algebras, e.g., by Jiří Adámek, Jiří Rosický, Locally Presentable and Accessible Categories, Corollary 3.13.






                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    The finitely presented rings are the compact objects of the category of rings.
                    That is, those objects $R$ such that the functor $hom(R,-)colon mathrm(Ring)tomathrm(Set)$ preserves filtered colimits.
                    In fact, this applies to any variety of algebras, e.g., by Jiří Adámek, Jiří Rosický, Locally Presentable and Accessible Categories, Corollary 3.13.







                    share|cite|improve this answer












                    share|cite|improve this answer



                    share|cite|improve this answer










                    answered 18 mins ago









                    Ben

                    4,03421332




                    4,03421332











                    • Also see qchu.wordpress.com/2015/04/25/compact-objects and replace modules by rings for a proof.
                      – Ben
                      17 mins ago
















                    • Also see qchu.wordpress.com/2015/04/25/compact-objects and replace modules by rings for a proof.
                      – Ben
                      17 mins ago















                    Also see qchu.wordpress.com/2015/04/25/compact-objects and replace modules by rings for a proof.
                    – Ben
                    17 mins ago




                    Also see qchu.wordpress.com/2015/04/25/compact-objects and replace modules by rings for a proof.
                    – Ben
                    17 mins ago

















                     

                    draft saved


                    draft discarded















































                     


                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2949766%2fcategorical-characterizations-of-ring-properties%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest
































































                    Comments

                    Post a Comment

                    Popular posts from this blog

                    What does second last employer means? [closed]

                    Image
                    Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP .everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0; up vote -3 down vote favorite Say, for example I have worked in the following companies, Company A => 2010 - 2011 Company B => 2011 - 2012 Company C => 2012 - Till Date Company D => Have offer Now assume Company D is asking to submit documents from my second last employer. So from the list of companies given, which company would be qualified as second last employer? software-industry employer share | improve this question asked Aug 10 '14 at 5:16 Rajaprabhu Aravindasamy 559 1 6 13 closed as off-topic by Jim G., jmort253 ♦ Aug 11 '14 at 1:58 This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason: "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address...
                    Read more

                    List of Gilmore Girls characters

                    Image
                    The season three cast—(Back row): Lane, Michel, Paris, Emily, Richard, Sookie, Miss Patty, Kirk; Front row: Jess, Luke, Lorelai, Rory, Dean This is a list of characters for the comedy-drama television series Gilmore Girls . Contents 1 Main characters 1.1 Lorelai Gilmore 1.2 Rory Gilmore 1.3 Sookie St. James 1.4 Lane Kim 1.5 Michel Gerard 1.6 Luke Danes 1.7 Emily Gilmore 1.8 Richard Gilmore 1.9 Paris Geller 1.10 Dean Forester 1.11 Jess Mariano 1.12 Kirk Gleason 1.13 Jason Stiles 1.14 Logan Huntzberger 2 Major recurring characters 2.1 Christopher Hayden 2.2 Jackson Belleville 2.3 Mrs. Kim 2.4 Tristin DuGray 2.5 Max Medina 2.6 Taylor Doose 2.7 Dave Rygalski 2.8 Marty 3 Recurring characters 3.1 Stars Hollow 3.2 Chilton 3.3 Yale 3.4 Other 4 Notable guest stars 5 Unseen characters 6 Notes 7 References Main characters Actor Character Appearances Season 1 Season 2 Season 3 Season 4 Season 5 Season 6 Season 7 A Year in the Life Lauren Graham Lorelai Gilmore...
                    Read more

                    Confectionery

                    Image
                    Prepared foods made with a lot of sugar or other cabohydrates "Sweetmeat" redirects here. For the racehorse, see Sweetmeat (horse). Not to be confused with Sweetbread. This Kransekake is a traditional Scandinavian baker's confection. Confectionery is the art of making confections , which are food items that are rich in sugar and carbohydrates. Exact definitions are difficult. [1] In general, though, confectionery is divided into two broad and somewhat overlapping categories, bakers' confections and sugar confections. [2] Bakers' confectionery, also called flour confections , includes principally sweet pastries, cakes, and similar baked goods. Sugar confectionery includes candies ( sweets in British English), candied nuts, chocolates, chewing gum, bubble gum, pastillage, and other confections that are made primarily of sugar. In some cases, chocolate confections (confections made of chocolate) are treated as a separate category, as are sugar-free versions of ...
                    Read more